It's gotta last beyond one guy......Osodecentx said:whiterock said:one of the brightest lines on that score is how well a Gov does in turning their state red.Osodecentx said:Damn RINOs4th and Inches said:Let’s get it done and elect @HerschelWalker to the U.S. Senate! pic.twitter.com/G2qXfPj83h
— Brian Kemp (@BrianKempGA) December 2, 2022
Only slightly late Kemp- better late than never!
Rick Perry did it. Ron DeSantis did it.
Kemp hasn't. Scott Walker (despite a lot of promise) didn't. Did they try? They'll say they did, but as Bill Parcells observed "at some point, you are your record." Kemp has presided over a red-state solidifying as a purple-state. Walker did not fundamentally change WI from purple to red.
And then they are the the Romneys and Hogans and Christies, etc.... who don't even try. Most blue state Republicans suffer framing bias from just being blue state governors. They cannot conceive of doing what a Perry or DeSantis has done and instead operate within the constraints of a blue state. Implicit in that is avoiding most of the GOP platform, being fearful of appearing to actually embrace much conservatism at all. In that mindset, "conservative" is merely a word which means "not liberal." GOP House caucus seems particularly predilected to elect blue state Republicans to leadership, invariably causing a case of alligator arms toward the party platform, leading to much consternation in the GOP base.
It's hard work changing minds on the meanings of things, to include defining one's opponents. Dems are way better at it.
If you do not work to change or keep your state red, it will not happen. A red state governor has to constantly cajole the donor class to embrace the partisan struggle, or it typically will not. Donor class as a rule is far more interested in access than in partisan nonsense.
Kemp is indeed late to the party.
I thought W Bush turned Texas red. Every statewide office holder since Bush has been Republican
Ann Richard's, Hightower, & plaintiff bar chipped in
More importantly, it's gotta go deep.
You have to gain strong majorities in all the house and senate and county level offices. You have to defeat recalcitrant Dems, or get them to switch. It has to be relentless, remorseless. You have to give scoresheets at state convention, to highlight the progress, year after year after year..... The purpose of that is to drain the bench, to deprive the opposing party of viable candidates ready to step & run for higher office. You know you are approaching critical mass when you have aspiring candidates all over the state calculate soberly that they have to run as a Republican because the odds of getting elected as a Dem ar too steep.
To appreciate the significance of that, look at it the other way. Who can the Dems run in Tx? Their bench is short and shallow. 11-ish Senators (mostly urban, with tiny geographic footprint districts). Sure, they'll have 50-70 House members, again, mostly from small urban districts with 170-180k constituencies. Those are small fundraising bases. 4-5 Mayors (big liberals) are a better options....much larger constituencies and fundraising bases, but typically not career politicians. They have a dozen Congress-types, buy Congress is prototypically not a great platform to run for statewide office in any large state. Not only will geography and fundraising base be limited, but they are "off the screen" on state-wide politics....not historically associated with state level issue and the cannot easily usurp their Congressional agenda to posture on state level issues.
Perry was remorseless......
Kemp?
Lost two statewide Senate seats.
one was an incumbent.
one was his own appointee.
Not a strong party leader, Kemp.....
